1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to split ring coil separating tools, and particularly to improvements to applicant's coil separating tool and method as disclosed in his U.S. Pat. No. 5,957,354 issued Sep. 28, 1999.
2. Prior Art
Applicant's issued patent (FIG. 2, split ring spring clip 66, and FIGS. 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, 4e, 4f, tool 34) discloses a stitchless fastener which is constructed and operates as follows: a pellet is placed inside a folded high strength material, which creates a bump. Once the coils are separated, the folded bump sandwich is inserted between the coils and into the interior periphery of a split ring (like a key ring) whose coils are so powerful they can only be parted with a prying tool. Tool withdrawal permits the coils to close, thereby trapping the pellet-containing material inside the split ring. The high tensile force generated in use can pull the bump created by the pellet no further than against the coils interior periphery because their powerful resistance to separation prevents escape of the pellet-containing high-strength material from between the coils.
Although the applicant's issued patent discloses the use of two tools for prying the coils apart in the Specification (col. 20, lines 49–51), it is obvious that only one operator's hand is free to hold a tool (not shown) since the other hand must be free to hold a split ring. No provision is made for holding the split ring in a fixed position so that both operators' hands can be occupied with the coil-prying tools. What is more, any attempted use of a conventional holding tool, such as a vise, to stabilize the split ring merely prevents coil separation and/or blocks access into the coils interior via between the coils.
Neither is there any means disclosed in the applicant's issued patent for the split rings to be firmly held in place while the operator overcomes the powerful resistance of the coils to separation from attempted entrance of the tool tips between them. Nor is there any resistance to attempted tool withdrawal from the coils' powerful grip (see Operation below).
Furthermore, nothing in the applicant's issued patent discloses what anti-rotational stabilizing force opposes the operators ¼ turn rotating action after the tool tips have been inserted between the coils. Without such opposition, rotating the tips merely rotates the clip along with the tips as a whole, without any coil separation occurring.
Since there is nothing to guide the tool tips into its correct position, the time that it takes an operator to position the tool tips exactly where necessary prior to insertion between the coils is relatively lengthy because the operator must hunt for the correct position each time. Lack of guidance of the tool tips towards their destination between the coils contributes immensely to undesirably long production cycle times.
There is also nothing to guide the bag corner bumps on its way into its correct position between the coils. The time that it takes an operator to position the bag corner exactly where necessary prior to insertion between the coils is relatively lengthy because the operator must hunt for the correct position each time. Lack of such guidance also means undesirably long production cycle times.
After completion of a loading cycle and withdrawal of the tool tips from between the coils, there is no provision for stopping the tool tips from traveling too far away and holding them in position just outside of the coils in order to be ready for the next loading cycle.
Using two unguided prying tools, uneven and asymmetrical tool tip insertion causes the separation distance between the opposing coils to be non-uniform across the width of the split ring, which interferes with ease of insertion of the bag corner bump.
Due to the tremendous force of their coils, without positively controlling them at the time of prying them apart, the split rings are unstable and dangerous. They can easily and suddenly snap out of position, go flying violently and cause operator injury, or at the least, damage the bag material;
Unlike the disclosure of FIG. 4e, reference number 28 of applicant's issued patent, in actual practice, the tool tip—after bag corner bump 28 is in its clamped position, but prior to the tool's withdrawal—makes contact with the bag corner, causing it damage.
Objects & Advantages
Accordingly, it would be desirable for a coil-separating tool to:                enable both operators' hands to be free and available for tool and bag handling;        efficiently guide both tool tips towards their correct insertion points at the split ring coils;        efficiently guide pellet-loaded bag corners towards their insertion points between separated split ring coils;        hold the split ring steady while an operator                    forces the tool tips between the coils;            rotates the coil-separating tools ¼ turn in opposition to the holding force,            rotates the tools ¼ turn back to its pre-load position, and            withdraws the tool tips from between the coils;                        force coils open uniformly across the entire width of the split ring;        separate the split ring coils without the tool tips occupying the space reserved for the bag corners;        keep the split rings stable and safe while performing its specified tasks, and        be withdrawn without damaging the clamped bag corner part with its pellet contents;        freely release the split ring with its captured bag corner as a unit, and        remain in position to efficiently accept the next assembly cycle.Further objects and advantages of my invention will become apparent from a consideration of the drawings and ensuing description.        